We use cookies on this website to enhance your browser experience. By continuing to use this site, you are providing us with your consent to our use of cookies on the site. To learn more about cookies and how we use them, please review our privacy policy.

Stuart M. Gerson, a Member of the Firm in the Litigation and Health Care and Life Sciences practices, in the firm’s Washington, DC, office, was quoted by POLITICO Pro’s David Pittman in the article “States Struggle with Telemedicine, Antitrust Allegations Post-SCOTUS Ruling.” (Read the full version – subscription required.)

Following is an excerpt:

Some states have set barriers that make it hard for out-of-state doctors working for direct-to-consumer companies like Teladoc, American Well and Doctor on Demand to treat patients via telemedicine. Arkansas and Texas require an in-person visit before any phone or video consultation. In Louisiana and Mississippi, medical boards want telemedicine doctors to have a relationship with an in-state medical practice. Alaska law says doctors must be in the state to prescribe drugs.

Advocates and lobbyists for the industry say such requirements are overly burdensome and exist to protect state doctors’ practices.

“They’re afraid of losing business,” said Stuart Gerson, an attorney with Epstein, Becker and Green in Washington. “It’s, in a sense, natural behavior. You try to protect your own turf.”